The rumors talk about cpu power too, if they are getting that wrong their statements about the gpu also lost credibility too.They could be right, nintendo is full of surprises, sometimes good some times bad, but right now the rumors about wiiU underpower look false if Nintendo is really using a P7.

*sigh*

Are you still really not getting this?  I'll try to explain it once more:

Here is your post again, which is what was flawed in the first place:  "The problem with this video is that the GPU is also rumored, and not official, we still don't know the specs, so thats why the rumors are plausible."

The video is completely irrelevant to why you make no sense.  What you are saying in your post, is that the rumors are still plausible because we don't know about the GPU.  With me so far?  Good.

However the rumors are not, repeat NOT criticizing the "Gee Pee You":  "A second source working on a big name franchise said GPU and RAM power "won't be a problem" on the new console", but are instead criticizing the "Cee Pee You":  "but a drop in CPU horsepower compared to 360 and PS3 could see Wii U lag behind in areas such as complicated physics and AI", which makes no sense because the CPU has been confirmed to be plenty capable.

No matter what the GPU is in WiiU, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE RUMORS ARE CRITICIZING, because, one more time with feeling, IT'S THE CPU THAT THE RUMORS ARE CRITICIZING.

Hence why your post:  "the GPU is also rumored, and not official, we still don't know the specs, so thats why the rumors are plausible." fails.

Make sense now?

Two Xbox 360s duct taped together...

What we know:

Small case.
Low power design.
Has to power a separate screen (or two) as well as render @ 720P.

Effective performance is likely to be somewhere between 1-2* the performance of the Xbox 360 depending on game design.

Once again, using the Gamecube (and almost all game consoles with the exception of the XBox, XBox 360 and PS3) as an example the size of the console doesn't tell us a lot about the real world performance of the system ...

It is highly likely that the Wii U will not be a monster on paper, but if the system is well designed, efficient and has the right customizations it could easily be a very powerful system at its current size. Consider what could be done with laptops (which are obviously not as efficiently designed and games are not optimized for their hardware specifically):

Stopped watching when he started comparing clock rates of GPUs of different architectures, he clearly doesn't know what he is talking about.

Still think the Wii U should be 2 as powerful as the 360 overall, but this video was just stupid

You really should watch the entire video so that we can hear more opinions pertaining to his CPU comparisons as well.

I have repeatedly stated in all those "WiiU is sub par threads" that the rumored GPU in the WIIU alone puts it above the current consoles.

... with a DS!

Ok so his CPU comparison is better than his face palm inducing GPU comparison, but he makes some assumptions that are not necessarily correct.

He uses the current spec ranges for power7 CPUs, which would be fine if the architectue hadn't only been used in high end supercomputers and servers. As they are those specifications are virtually meaningless to whatever chip ends up in the Wii U.

Just because they have only gone down to 2.4GHz and 4MB of L3 per core in a server enviroment doesn't mean that IBM couldn't make a chip that was clocked at 1GHz with no L3 for example (not that I think Nintendo would go with such a chip), also the solid sources just say a multi-core Power7 (IBM press release) with rumours that have mentioned 3 and 4 core CPUs so we don't really know, tho there seem to be more quad core (3GHz) lately, but Nintendo may reserve a core for the OS.

Also the 4 SMT feature doesnt really mean that you can execute 4 threads per core at once, it just means the pipeline can hold 4 "thread states", it can still only execute one thread per cycle per core. Where it does come into effect is if a thread is stalled (happens when the thread is waiting for information, usally from memory as it can take several cycles of CPU time to access cache, even more to access L3 cache and a lot more to access main RAM ) it can execute the next thread in the que instead of just ideling. It improves performance but only in instances where you have more threads than you have cores, most games today usally use 2-4 threads at once so only most game engines wouldn't see any advantage in performance (tho highly threaded engines are starting to appear), and it might be worth cutting the feature in a console (in a server enviroment it is a very valuable feature) CPU as it adds complexity to the CPU for what might be a very small or non existant performance gain for games.

Oh and a bonus I stumbled on this http://www.amd.com/us/products/embedded/graphics-processors/Pages/ati-radeon-e4690.aspx R700 bassed embedded GPU, probably a closer comparison to what will be in the Wii U than a desktop GPU, likely clocked up and hopefully with GDDR5 instead of 3 and with a nice chunck of eDRAM. It's low wattage and already designed for embedded solutions.

Wishful thinking...

We know the Wii U likely uses the 40/45nm lithography process (if you've been paying attention) and we know the Wii U case size is only 1/3rd larger than the Wii. Just do the math...